free2chose2 67F
868 posts
4/12/2006 6:03 am

Last Read:
4/13/2006 9:02 am


As we are in "holy week" on this site as well bring many christians to biblical thoughts.

It's always been said that the bible is relative to present living.

Now Hagar was the hand maiden of Sarah, wife of Abraham who is father of the original 12 tribes of Israel.

Sarah could not conceive or in fact was not patient on the Lord's promise to start this great nation with her offspring.

She instructed her hand maiden Hagar to have intercourse(sex) with her husband. Hagar conceived and bore Ishmael.

Years later Sarah bore Isaac "child of the promise".

Now what has that to do with here now or anything else?

It was a convenient arrangement. All parties benefited. Actually Hagar, being from North Africa i.e. Egypt had better positioning in the tribe because she had bore the apparent heir. Sarah being her mistress was the legal mother. Our first surrocacy.

Then Sarah finally conceived and bore this male child. She no longer wanted Hagar and her son around.

Abraham didn't want to send them away but his back was against the wall and he and Sarah had such history and well Hagar was a slave.

So off they went into the desert with little to no supplies for their mere existence. From concubine to castaway.

If not for the recorded epphinany, they and their history would be swept away like the desert sand. Too bad Abraham couldn't have handled it a better way. We might not have the Palestinians and Israelites at each other throats today.

Could/Should Sarah have waited?

Could/should Hagar have declined this "surrocacy propostion"?

What should/could Abraham have done before, during or after the fact?

This was repeated again between two sisters, Leah and Rachel. He(Israel) really wanted the younger Rachel and not the older Leah.

Don't worry, be Happy

Become a member to create a blog